St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1887-10-29
ARE THEY TO SUFFER?
The Case Of the Condemned
Anarchists Now Fully
Argued.
The PreSentment to the Su-
preme Court Concluded
Yesterday.
Judge Grinnell Presents the
Case Of the State of
Illinois,
And is Followed by Gen. But
ler Who Closes for the
Prisoners.

WASHINGTON, Oct 29.-When the
United States supreme court convened
at noon to-day there was not quite as
large an attendance of members of the
bar as yesterday, but the seats pro-
vided for spectators were all filled and
the open spaces adjacent to the en-
trance to the court room were crowded
with people, who stood there patiently
until the argument in the anarchist
cases was concluded. After the usual
ceremony of opening the court the chief
justice requested Attorney General
Hunt to proceed with his argument,
which was interrupted by the adjourn
ment OF the court yesterday afternoon.
MIR. Hunt said that as he had almost
finished when the hour of adjournment
arrived he would not speak to-day, but
would give place to his associate. States
Attorney Grinnell.
Mr.: Grinnell, addressing the court, said
That 1t had not been his intention to take
part in the oral argument, and that he came
mere primarily for the purpose of assisting
MI. Hunt by means of his familiarity with the
record in this case. He thought that by the
presentation of the law and the facts yester-
day it was clearly shown that there was no
federal question involved, and that the court
was without jurisdiction to grant the writ of
error. The assignment of error in the lower
court and the parts of the record relating to
the Jurors, Denker and Sanford, had been
printed and were in the courts hands. In
all the twenty-eight assignments of error
there was no reference directly or indirectly
to the constitution Of the United States or
any of its amendments. There were some
things, he said, which were generally con
ceded, and one of them was that the consti-
tuition itself conferS no rights which need be
here considered. 1t is simply Limitation of
the rights of legislative power in dealing
of the state of Illinois contains almost all the
provisions which are embraced in the consti-
tuition of the United States.
THIS COURT HAD SETTLED,
he believed. the question of Jurisdiction as
far as the first ten amendments are con-
cerned, and also, he thought, under the Four
teenth amendment. The only clause of the
latter which could figure here was that ''No
state shall deprive any person Of life, liberty
or property without due process of law.''
Whatever affects liberty and life is made by
this clause to affect also property If the
court has jurisdiction of this case under this
provision of the amendment, then every state
question relating to property, such as special
assessments, the condemnation of property.
ETC., might be brought to this court for re-
view.
The Chief Justice-Because they take prop
erty without valuation by a jury?
Mr.. Grinnell-YeS, your honor in some
cases they do, especially in the matter of
drainage, where the proceedings NAV be be-
fore justice of the peace.
Mr.. Grinnell said he thought it would be
conceded that a state legislature had a right
to prescribe how many peremptory chal-
lenges should be allowed in the formation of a
jury. The common law Of Illinois had been
radically changed in this respect and both
prosecutor and defendant now stood on an
equal footing. Each defendant was entitled
to twenty peremptory challenges and as the
eight defendants in this case acted in con
cert and were all consulted each of them had
state had like number. The defendants ex-
hausted all of their 16O peremptory chal-
lenges before a jury was obtained and the
state availed itself of its privilege to the ex-
tent of fifty-two challenges. He maintained,
however, that no federal question would be
involved, even if the state allowed only one
peremptory challenge to one side and 16O to
the other. 1t was the states right In this
case there were 9S1 men called into the jury
box and examined in order to obtain twelve
jurors. No objection was raised to any
one of these twelve jurors, with the
single exception of Sanford. Denker was
challenged for cause after brief eXamina-
ton. the challenge was overruled and the
defense excepted; but they then proceeded
with further and more elaborate examina-
ton of him, and it is shown by the record
that after this second examination they de-
sired TO keep him, that they did keep him.
When Denker was taken the defense had
left 142 peremptory challenges and they
could have used one of these challenges to
get rid of him if they had been very desirous
tory challenges after eleven jurors had been
sworn. These fOrty-three challenges they
frittered away frivolously foolishly and
ridiculously for the purpose of taking some
possible advantage. Their peremptory chal-
lenges were then exhausted, and they had to
either take juror or show cause why he
should be rejected The examination of
Sanford, the last juror, clearly demonstrates,
Mr.. Grinnell said, that the defense were
more ready to take him than the state was
Not single juror was put up on the defense
to exhaust their peremptory challenges
Whenever man said that he had talked with
witness, or any one who was present at the
Haymarket meeting, or that he had attended
the coroner's inquest he was rejected for
cause. Speaking of
THE JURY AS A WHOLE
Mr.. Grinnell said: II wish and am con-
strained to pay one tribute to that jury. 1t
eXemplified American citizenship in this
country more than any jury that was ever
looked upon. 1t embraced all walks of life.
Three of them earned their living by manual
work. They came from all parts of the coun
try, and one OF them was born on foreign
soil. They were not class jury. They were
honest citizens, with the solemn duty devolv-
ing upon them of determining what should
be done with those men. No judge could
They are Intelligent; they represent Ameri-
can citizenship; they are fit to be trusted
with the rights of freemen under our consti-
tuition. There was not capitalist on that
Jury, jury They ,,e were all commonplace, small
said he would challenge any one to show
that single member of that Jury was not a
competent juror, not only under the jury law
of Illinois, but under the common law "Con-
gress," he said, "had recognized the right of
states to make their own jIlry laWsn Section
800, of the Revised Statutes. provides
that Jurors to serve in the courts
of the United States in each state
respectively shall have the same qualifca-
tions and be entitled to the same exemptions
as jurors Of the highest court of law in such
state may have and be entitled to at the time
when such jurors for service in the courts of
the United States are summoned Almost
every state In the North, he said, now has its
new jury law, and these laws have been sus-
tanned by the highest state courts. Proceed
ing to the question of unreasonable search
and seizure in Spies Office, he said it did
not strike him as being any part of this case
He was not here to offer any apologies for
his own conduct He then recited at some
length the circumstances of the bomb throw
ing in the Haymarket. the search of the Ar
better Zeitung Office, the prying open Of
Spies desk, the finding of dynamite and let
ters there, the breaking open of Lingg' s
domicile and the finding in his trunk of dyn-
amite bombs precisely like the one thrown
Mr.. Grinnell was interrupted at this point by
Gen. Butler, who said he should want to
cross-examine him if it was competent for
him to do so.
Mr.. Grinnell-You shall have that privi.
lege, general.
Mr.. Grinnell, resuming said that such seiz-
ure was not q thing which this court could
regulate. 1t had said
.A IN THE KER KIDNAPPING CASE
.D.hat 1t was not for the court to determine how